… or “Viewer Participation” is an essential part of all entertainment TV programmes now. Or at least it was until it was revealed to viewers that the TV companies were ripping them off in many instances.
But votes on programmes such as B** B****** have always been an intrinsic part and invariably there’s always someone willing to pipe up about more votes being cast for the programme than at the last general election. What such “stats” fail to make clear is that the programmes practically encourage repeat-voting. As a rule Parliament doesn’t like vote-stuffing in real world elections (well, unless you come from particular parts of Scotland, but let’s not go into that now).
And if you’re TV company is taking home 25p for every text and phone vote sent, then there’s no real incentive to try to enforce a one-phone/one-vote rule. The BBC occassionally tries something to stop vote-stuffing when things like the Today Programme are electing their person of the year. But really, most people don’t care.
Anyway, fast-forward to this week and C4 is reportedly cutting the cost of calling B** B****** by 50%, with no profit now being made by the channel. All very gallant.
But I’m curious to know what to think of the next part of the article:
Channel 4 said text voting had been axed because mobile phone operators cannot process SMS messages within a time frame suitable for the voting procedures on the programme.
Really? C4’s always managed this in the past. Does that mean that text votes weren’t counted in the past? Seemingly not:
“The voting has been fair and transparent throughout Big Brother’s eight years on air, but given the recent focus on the use of premium-rate phone lines on TV we want to ensure the audience has absolute confidence in the evictions, which are absolutely integral to the show’s success,” said Andy Taylor, the Channel 4 managing director, new media.
Phew. That’s OK then.
But a cynic might rather suspect that there may just have been, on occassion, instances where maybe not every single text vote was counted in the past. There was certainly an instance recently when ITV admitted that 11,500 Vodafone votes failed to be counted for an episode of Dancing on Ice. Fortunately for all concerned, the outcome of the programme’s elimination would have been unchanged regardless of these missing votes. But to go back to a General Election analogy, even if one candidate won my constituency by 10,000 votes, that doesn’t mean that I wouldn’t mind if the van driving the ballot box from my village hall got lost, and its votes weren’t counted (Or maybe the ferry coming from my island).
Nothing like covering your backside after the event is there?
In other reality news, is it just me, or is common decency and morality getting harder to find. In Australia there’s the B** B****** contestant who’s father has died but who hasn’t been told. She’s missed the funeral. Seemingly, she agreed to this course of events before entering the house, and her family are supportive. All I can say is that a lot of people have got their priorities very badly wrong. A fleeting attempt at “fame” is not worth it. In whatever passes in Australia for Heat magazine, she’ll forever be remembered as the glory seeker who’d miss her own father’s funeral to take part in a game show.
Meanwhile in the Netherlands, three contestants are competing to “win” a new kidney. Words fail me.
Coming soon, text your votes in to say which prisoner on death row gets executed live on Friday night’s show, and which gets a reprieve! You decide!